Skip to main content

About your Search

20121205
20121213
STATION
CSPAN 47
LANGUAGE
English 47
Search Results 0 to 46 of about 47 (some duplicates have been removed)
parts of this. when you hear about the fiscal cliff, it is not really the tax rate. i do not buy that at all. i do not think we need to increase these tax rates. >> if you go over and the tax rates go up on everyone and all that goes away -- >> i do not think we should do it. i think we should resolve this. it depends on if we do something about it in the next month or two after that. if we do something in 30 days or 90 days and we are clear about that, but nothing people believe we are going to do something until we do it. >> the to go to the broader concern. does the top rate have to end the 39.6% the way it was under bill clinton? could be democrats accept something between if it was coupled with a reduction in the ability on the top 2% to except a reduction of deductions? >> i do not want to second-guess what we might decide. i do not think that is what we should debate the right now. multimillionaires and what deductions they can take is something different. this is where we are. >> that is in addition to. >> yes, in addition to. the problem with having that debate now sugge
issues in general when it comes to the fiscal cliff. if you have questions about tax issues or comments about how taxes should be included in these discussions, he will be taking your calls. up next, we're going to have a look at republicans and the fiscal cliff negotiations with radio talk-show host and columnist armstong williams. that is coming up next as we continue the "washington journal." ♪ >> why a writers institute? i think it is very important within the culture. we are a culture of words, of voices. words are key to our imagination, our capacity to envision things. we ourselves are not completely tied to print on the page. but i think that there is no other art form so readily accessible other than perhaps -- but it is something -- there is something in literature that captures the humans. . >> this weekend, we look behind the scenes at the history and literary life of new york's capital city, albany, on c-span to and it c-span3. span3.c- [bell rings] >> this weekend on c-span3, follow harry truman's eldest grandson to hiroshima. >> everybody has their own view of what happ
of you have -- it comprised of the broad description of the fiscal cliff whether it is the expiring tax cut provisions, the expiring tax cut extensions, and spending cuts as well. if you consider more, which of those would you consider having the biggest bang for the buck in terms of economic impact of those that we are discussing here today? >> it is a given that we will extend the current tax rates for taxpayers that make less than $250,000 on an annual basis. that is absolutely necessary. when you consider the other things that are happening -- in terms of the bang for the buck, the emergency unemployment insurance program is very effective. it is small in the grand scheme of things. cbo is estimating it would costs per calendar year about $33 million. but the economic to bitty for job growth compared to the unemployment rate would be measurably more than that -- for the economic unemployment -- economic opportunity for job growth compared to the unemployment rate would be measurably more than that. we are down to go to million people in the program. it is falling each year. i expect
democrats. "no signs of reaching a deal revealed." as part of this so-called fix -- fiscal cliff, what tax deductions would you give up? fort lauderdale, hello. caller: hello. good morning. i feel that i would be willing to give up some of my medicare benefits. i currently get free shoes and other benefits from medicare that i would be willing to give up. host: anything that you would be willing to give up on your taxes? items that you have in the past? caller: i would be willing to give up my charitable deductions. host: how come? caller: i feel that i give part of it to my charitable deductions. host: would you still make donations to charity if you could not write it off on your taxes? caller: yes, i would. host: thank you for your call. joe? caller: i would be willing to give up earned income credit and i liked what the last caller said about modifying the amount for charitable deductions. i think that sometimes the very rich use that to give to charities that actually benefit themselves. i also have a contingency, which would be to reform the bankruptcy act and remove those benefits f
on the fiscal cliff, a focus this morning on the expiring tax provisions. host: today we're looking at the issue of tax extenders or tax incentives for business and individuals. and joining us in this discussion is sam goldfarb, who is a tax writer for c.q. roll call. what are tax extenders? >> well, they're temporary tax breaks. that's basically i think the most basic definition and some people are kind of concerned that the entire tax code is turning into one big tax extendser. so where do you really define it? but i think traditionally they're considered to be these pretty small provisions, narrowly targeted at specific types of businesses. some of them do apply to individuals as well. >> so why are they temporary? >> that's a good question. i think a lot of people, including people in congress, say either they should be made permanent or they should be eliminated altogether. but they're temporary because it's easier to pass that way. it looks like it costs less. usually they keep on being ex tended and extended. so so in effect they're almost permanent. host: we're going to look at some of t
down payment to avoid what people are calling the fiscal cliff, the automatic tax increases for every american or the beginning of the 10 years automated cuts that are supposed to happen but i don't think that anything is going to happen immediately. it has to happen over the long-term chsm is an acknowledgment of how difficult the sticking points are and challenges are. >> meredith, righting for "roll call," covering the fiss -- fiscal cliff discussions on capitol hill. thanks for joining us. >> thanks for having me. >> john boehner has sent president obama a counterour. a spokesman for house speaker boehner declined to share details of the offer but said the proposal would solve our looming debt crisis and create american jobs. we're still waiting for the white house to identify what spending cuts the white house will make and the longer the white house slow walk this is policy the close we get to fiscal cliff. we'll hear what senate leaders had to say today they spoke for 15 minutes at the capitol. >> it's time to see if the president is willing to make any cuts at all and whether
growth. we passed a bill a few months ago that prevents the fiscal cliff by saying no taxes will be increased, a bipartisan bill. all of those votes, were criticized for. they called us right wing nuts and extremists. we explain to the people what we want to do to get our economy moving again, but also to control spending in washington. and we were reelected with a mandate not only to continue to be in charge of the house, but to be the line of defense against the radical administration. i think we know what our task is. all but, for candidates -- all but four of the 30 candidates elected are talking about joining rsc. they were elected on these principles we believe in. i am comfortable with where we are positioned now, but i know it is going to be a tough ride ahead. we would not be doing this if it was not a mandate the people sent us to go do. >> something on all of our minds is the fiscal cliff. i would be remiss if i did not ask you both to weigh in on it in the following way. first, what is going on that we do not understand? number two, what should happen? number 3,
on different aspects of the fiscal cliff. we want to look at capital gains tax and the estate tax. what is the estate tax? guest: it goes back to history -- it was put in place to prevent the united states from developing an aristocracy. a tax on estates that are passed down to heirs. republicans called the death tax. they have characterized it as a bad thing. it has a lot of a populist opposition to it. george w. bush signed in a phase-out of the estate tax. the top rate stays at 55%. the exemption level started rising from $1 million and going up. it was repealed completely in 2010 for one year. then it sprang back to life as part of the extension of the bush tax cuts that president obama signed into law. you have a debate -- very few members dispute that it needs to be continued. the debate is over whether you continue it at the current level. there is an exemption level, $10 million for a couple. or at the white house would prefer a 45% rate. that is the debate right now. there's a split among democrats. the white house wants a less generous estate tax. red-leaning states like max b
the government point of view, everybody is talking about jobs and the fiscal cliff. everyone talks about taxes and what is going to happen with the fiscal cliff. there has been $1500 gone to increase oil prices. you can get them that tax cut today if you invested in our report. everybody talks about entitlements. high oil prices make the social security trust insolvent five years sooner than they would if he did not have high oil prices. america needs jobs and growth. following the recommendations in our report will lead to both of those. it would be good for american business. >> i will start with senator alexander. tell me about energy policy and where it fits in with the fiscal cliff. what we will spend money on and how we were tightened our belts. >> the major place it fits is the right policy would create an environment which would produce a lot more revenue. that would help to reduce the debt. the federal government doesn't spend much money on energy. energy research is about $6 billion a year. i would like to see it doubled. this report is a blueprint for independence and i think it is
is enough to get us past the fiscal cliff, turn off these automatic spending cuts and make sure that taxes don't go up. and then they would figure out what to do with the upper bracket. and then there would be a mechanism that would guarantee further action next year. if at all possible, they would disagree next year and there would be some sort of trigger or punishment for their lack of action. that sounds relatively simple, i think, putting it all together could take at least a couple of weeks after they have a deal. there could be some inevitable blocks either by conservatives in the house or in the senate. blowups either byow wha conservatives in the house or in the senate. the details can get pretty political party quickly. there's so much in flux. it all presupposes that the get an agreement. there was a school of thought that they could not get an agreement until tax rates actually go up next year. >> you can follow himat @apandrewtaylor. >> a discussion on the u.s. economy and you pull in the middle class with participants from think tanks, academia and business at 8:30 a.m. easter
extended. if the fiscal cliff debate is only limited to tax rates and deficit reduction, and not the debt ceiling, this will come up again. president obama once the debt ceiling to be part of this agreement. the reason why is simple, because that is where republicans have leverage in february. he needs republicans to extend the debt ceiling for the government to function with all going into default. republicans know this, and in theory they could separate the two to maximize their leverage. host: time for a couple more calls in this segment of the "washington journal," we will continue the unemployment insurance discussion in the following segment. laura is in louisville, kentucky, on the independent line. caller: good morning. what bothers me is when people say they actually can not find work and they have been on unemployment for 20 months, whatever they can get, and i will tell you my husband lost his job five years ago. he was with a company for 23 years. immediately we went into survival mode. we thought about what we could do to reduce bills, simplify our lifestyle in case he could
in terms of the fiscal cliff without insuring that we ask the top 1% or 2% to pay their fair share in taxes. they're paying lower income taxes than in almost any time in our history since we implemented income tax. they have had a great deal. president obama said that up for them. -- president bush set that up for them. we ask the wealthy to pay for their fair share. what we had was economic prosperity. when you see the gains they're playing in congress right now, to suggest he could do this with deductions is not true. the math does not add up. the president has to stick to his guns in insuring that it is time for the wealthiest americans to help bail out from this mess. we have to make cuts. they have to be prudent. the president and vice-president do not believe the way to balance the budget is on the backs of the states. if they reduce the commitment to health care, medicare, medicaid and say we will reduce the reimbursement and shift the burden back to the states, the president knows that is not doing anything to achieve his goal of universal health care at a time when we are implement
on the fiscal cliff negotiations. after that, in look at the estate tax which is set to go up at the end of the year unless congress and the white house at. "washington journal" is live this morning at 7:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. >> today, politico hosted discussion with bob woodward, author of "the price of politics," and margaux rubio. mike allen moderates the discussion. see it live that to it -- at 8:10 a.m. eastern on c-span 3. >> this weekend, on c-span 3, american history tv, follow harry truman's eldest grandson to hiroshima as they prepare to mark the dropping of the atomic bomb. >> i don't want to argue to argue. at think we're past that. my whole purpose for being here is to honor the dead and to do what i can to visit the southern half. >> clifton truman daniel will join us and talk to us about the inspiration for his trip sunday and 9:00 p.m. eastern on c-span 3. >> the campaign to fix the debt held a forum-today on health care costs and the tax code. next, senator max baucus called on congress to extend the bush era tax cuts on incomes under $250,000. this is 15 minutes. >
. when you hear about the concern about the fiscal cliff, it is not the tax rates. i do not buy that. i do not think we need to increase the tax rates. >> if you go over and the tax rates go up, all of that goes away. >> we should not do it. we should resolve this. it depends on whether we then do something about it in the next month or two after it. we set ourselves on a path to do something within 30, 60, or 90 days and we are clear about that. people do not believe we will do it unless we do something. that is our worries. >> as part of that second stage, does the top rate have to end at 39.6? are there ways democrats can accept something in between bush and clinton if it was coupled with a reduction in the ability of people to take certain deductions or credits? would you see a top rate below 39.6 when the dust settles? >> i do not want to second-guess what we may decide. i think we should go to 39%. that is not what we should be debating. i do not think it is instead of >> it is in addition to. >> yes. having that debate now suggests that that is all we have to do. most people who
with the fiscal cliff. this is an arbitrary, across-the-board tax increase. the combination of which will mean that if we are unable to resolve the fiscal cliff without raising taxes, we'll already see a lot of new taxes as a result of the health care law on financial transactions, on insurance programs, on every single working american. so that's why we have our speaker, john boehner, trying to present president obama with an alternative that says rather than raising taxes which is already going to happen on january 1 from this massive new tax increase that was in the health care bill, why don't we find a way to understand and have the economy take that in hand first? i know the president stood here at the state of the union address and said we're not going to spend one dime of taxpayer money. i know the president stood here and said every single american can keep your own insurance plan. i know the president has made these promises to the american people and these are things that we're going to have to understand about january 1 next year. and i believe that's why we need to have john boehne
. the fiscal cliff involves nearly four dollars of anticipated revenue from higher taxes for every dollar of spending cuts, yet the president wants more revenue and fewer spending cuts. if we fell off the cliff, his plan calls for another round of stimulus spending. you have got to be kidding me. what the president's plan lacks is any reform in our entitlement system. the unrestrained growth in entitlement system is driving deficits and driving the debt even higher than the percentage of our gdp. it is estimated to be as high as $128 trillion. even if they confiscate all of the income that excesses $1 million, we cannot pay for the entitlement commitments that the federal government has made. we have made promises to ourselves that we simply cannot keep. without some sensible entitlement reform, our credit rating will be downgraded again. we will become a country that none of us recognize. secondly, fiscal plans failed to achieve their government budget deficit or debt reduction goals. dr. hassett has examined fiscal plans in other countries. on average, unsuccessful plans proposed an inc
of negotiations on the so-called fiscal cliff. disagreements on taxing the wealthy remains one of the sticking points between the two sides. this is about five minutes. >> good morning, everyone. this is not a progress report because there is no progress to report. when it comes to the fiscal cliff that is threatening our economy and threatening jobs, the white house has wasted another week. eight days ago, secretary geithner kaine your to offer a plan that had twice the tax hikes that the president campaigned on. it had more stimulus spending than it had in cuts, and it had an indefinite and infinite increase in the debt limit, like forever. four days ago, we offered a serious proposal based on testimony of president clinton's former chief of staff. since then, there has been no counteroffer from the white house. instead, reports indicate that the president has adopted a deliberate strategy to push our economy right to the edge of the fiscal cliff. instead of reforming the tax code and cutting spending, the president wants to raise tax rates. even if the president got the tax rate hike he wan
a fallback plan for the so called "fiscal cliff", which includes extending tax cuts for the middle class and resuming a fight over spending and taxes for the wealthy later. meanwhile, going overseas, nato makes a move on the turkish border with syria. military officials deny preparations for military intervention. protesters in egypt march on the palace as mohamed morsi flees. international and domestic news is all on the table for you this morning as we open up the phone lines. also, send us a tweet. or post your comment on facebook. or send us an e-mail. we will get back to that new york times story. first, some other headlines on the domestic front. here is the "washington times." also, sticking with the senate, the baltimore sun reporting this headline -- in politics, here is the denver post -- open phones before the first 30 minutes. we have a short show because the house is coming in at 9:00. steve in gaithersburg, maryland, a republican caller. caller: host: when did the republican party become the party that restricts poor? i understand the tax cut for the rich is important to so
economy right to the edge of the fiscal cliff. intent of reforming the tax code, the president wants to raise tax rates. even if the president got the tax rate hikes he wanted, understand we would continue to see trillion dollar deficit for a start -- far is that i can see. listed, washington has a problem spending, not the revenue problem. the president does not agree with our proposal. i believe is an obligation to families and small businesses to offer a plan of his own, a plan that can pass both chambers of the congress. we are ready and eager to talk to the president about such a plan. >> you did speak with the president earlier this week. did he have any kind of counter offer? we understand he is making clear it has to be increasing rates for the wealthy or no deal. are you willing to give up a little bit? >> the phone call was pleasant, but more of the same. it is time for the president, if he is serious, to come back to us with a counter offer. >> and a plan is down roughly to the same last year. [inaudible] why take such a risk when the jobs number is improving? >> the rest
with northern charm and southern efficiency. let's assume we go through the fiscal cliff. immigration, corporate tax reform, and investments. emigration, you're not doing the dramatic. vietor due to comprehensive immigration but we did not have a chance to do it. both wings cayman decided it would sabotage it. maybe republicans learned the lesson but i am not sure how much of a lesson. the way that was financed was through the corporate tax increase but there -- that had people on both sides will in to work with the white house and congress. when you talk about infrastructure spending and investments in things we have done with nih, all the talk now is about death. >-- how do you do what the ambitious and admirable the agenda envisions? >> will have the discussion of the debt ceiling again in january. we're not getting away from the somewhat of a doomsday scenario for quite some time. which would allow us to get to glen's position. it is important because the priorities that you outlined are not partisan. people did not have a disagreement as to whether the federal government should have a role
what happens if we go off this fiscal cliff. it's a spending decision and a tax decision, but i list them both up here. this chart comes from the congressional research service. a couple interesting things i want to point out here. first and foremost, if we do nothing, tax increases of about $400 billion, there are going to be spending reductions of about $102 billion, there are some other changes that happen at the end of the year that aren't associated with policy decisions, at the end of the day we change the scope of our deficit by about $607 billion. if we do nothing, that's what makes this such a hard issue to grapple with, mr. speaker, if we do nothing, if we reach no agreement, changes that happen automatically and burden us all in different ways, will create $607 billion for the u.s. treasury that we didn't have before. and that's only half of the annual deficit. you see all the pan damone yum that -- pandemonium folks are describing, all the frightful words used to describe the fiscal cliff, if we roll over that fiscal cliff and all of those bad things come to bear, the tax
the fiscal cliff. after that, john podesta oh talks about tax laws. -- talks about tax laws. tomorrow morning's "washington journal does quote a representative peter welch talks about the fiscal cliff negotiations. -- " ashington journal" has representative peter welch talk about the fiscal cliff negotiations. after that, joseph schatz on estate tax. >> we are at the new york state museum. this is every gallery that is dedicated to the history of september 11 and the attacks on new york's world trade center. we have decided that this gallery could heltell the storyf the first moment of attack using objects found out the site. this is a he said steel from the south tower -- and this is a piece of from the south tower. because the visitor a real tangible experience. this is a piece of steel from the north tower. this is a germanic piece of steel. iece of steel.pic you can see where the windows would have been. every piece of steel is marked so you know which build theing, which floor. this one was picked because it was close to the impact. it has the chart numbers 71-74 from the time of constru
principles. host: do they believe a recession could happen if we fall off the so called "fiscal cliff?" guest: they do. what we saw last year is business leaders were concerned that washington was not going to come together with a deal. and that it could end badly, but it was a more muted concern. they just trusted washington would get it done. given how quickly things happened last time, they are taking a much more active role. business leaders have come to washington to require a minimum height standard for the ride of the fiscal cliff. they want to make sure that members of either party who are speaking out are as close as possible to simpson-bowles. talk about real cuts, about real revenue. it's much more and ownership in the process this time. host: where does your group come down on regulations? guest: our job is to go out and get business leaders around the country more involved. the business leaders speak for themselves. business leaders are generally extremely influential in their home markets. there are the kind of people if that can give a member of congress moderate republican or
. >> the joint economic committee today heard from the two economists on how to deal with the fiscal cliff. marchese said tax increases are necessary to reduce the deficit. senator bob casey of pennsylvania chaired the hearing. >> the committee will come to order. we want to thank everyone for being here today. i did not have a chance to personally greet our witnesses, but i will have time to do that later. i want to thank both of our witnesses for being here. i will have an opening statement that i will make, and then i will turn it to dr. burgess. i know that vice chairman brady will be her as well. we know the challenges that we confront here in congress on a whole range of issues which are sometimes broadly described under the umbrella of the terminology, fiscal cliff -- when we confront those difficult challenges, we have to ask ourselves a couple of basic questions. one of the basic questions we must ask is, what will be the result and will be the impact as it relates to middle income families? what will happen to them in the midst of all these tough issues we have to work out? we kn
not have a deal, your taxes are going to go up. a lot of americans to not know a lot about the fiscal cliff. the confidence and a market reaction is very different than the spending cuts and tax increases. here is the fundamental point. i could be wrong, it happened once. why find out? it is irresponsible to govern the country this way. the sequester and across the board cut, it is bat policy. everybody knows it is bad policy. we are very close to doing it. i find the whole situation unsatisfying. host: our phone lines are open and you can also send us an e- mail. you work for a number of members of the democratic party. you work for the president. a question that comes up often is why there is a partisan divide. what has changed over the last 20 or 30 years? guest: we only have an hour so we cannot go through all of that. there are a lot of things. there are some extraordinary changes. politics as a con tact sport is a substantial change from when i worked on the hill. they did not agree on anything, but they enjoy each other's company. i have seen with my own eyes republicans and democrat
,000 or less will have -- see a tax increase on january 1. hopefully we will resolve the fiscal cliff, get an agreement. but i again ask my friend, the walz bill will be compliant with the rules. it will not have a blue slip problem, obviously. and hopefully we could move that bill. again, for the purposes of giving confidence to the 98% of our taxpayers who are making less than the sums put forward in the bill, $200,000, $250,000. i understand and anticipate the gentleman's response, that we are all concerned with growing the economy, creating jobs. we don't want to dampen that dam and we understand the gentleman's concern about small businesses, particularly those 3% of small businesses who make more than this and report it on a personal income basis. but i would hope that we could give serious consideration to trying to act sooner than the end of the year and as soon as possible, frankly, on the mid -- as we call it the middle class tax cut, the $250,000 and under and i yield to my friend to see whether or not perhaps the actions that have been taken this week have any bearing on his th
topic once again, the fiscal cliff. joining us here is stan collender and douglas holtz- eaken. what is happening? what are the two talking about. guest: the nature of the tax increases, how much, and on the other side, what kind of entitlement reforms as the president willing to offer? that has been going back and forth for quite awhile now. there are talking about the same basic issues. host: one of the shore signs of action in washington, we have heard there is a possibility that they could come back after christmas. guest: i have been telling clients since september we were going over the cliff. i was not sure there was a sign it or coming back before christmas. this last-minute deal of some time, it could easily be approved -- the house and senate do not need to be here for this because it will not be the big, big deal. this is not the grand compromise they are talking about here there is not enough support to do the technical things. this could be a simple package they do at the last minute. host: even if the white house and john boehner agree to a deal, congress may not pass i
the changes we need to make in terms of the fiscal cliff, or or what i call the fiscal slope without ensuring that we ask the top 1% or 2% of the americans pay their fair share in income taxes. we all know that the top 1% or 2% is paying lower income taxes than any time in our history. they've had a great deal, president bush set that up for them but we as nation did better under the clinton tax policies where we asked the wealthy to pay their fair share and the result was economic prosperity. we can't balance the budget without having new revenue come from the wealthy. when you see the games they are play in congress right now to suggest you can do that with reductions and other ways, it is not true. the math does not add up. the president needs to stick to his guns and i know he will. in ensuring the wealthiest americans to help the great nation bailout from this mess. second, when we talk about cuts we have to make them. i can tell you the president and the vice president do not believe that the way to balance the budget is on the backs of the states. if they reduce the commitment to healt
a bill just a few months ago that prevents are the fiscal cliff by saying nobody's taxes will be increased. all of those votes we were criticized for. they called us right-wing naughts. we explained to the people of the country what we want to do to number one get our economy going on and get our economy going again. we were re-elected with a mandate, not only to be in charge of the house, but to be a line of defense against a radical administration. i think we know what our task is. if you look at r.s.c. strength, and i don't think it's ever been stronger in terms of numbers and resolve. that will be our challenge because we will be tested. because you have so many members that are coming back that have been through this fight, that have been afact for the things we fought for in the last congress, but also the candidates that got elected, over 30 candidates, all but four, paul teller tells me, all four have expressed an interest in joining r.s.c. so you got a lot of people that ran in a tough environment and got elected talking about these conservative principles that w
reassessed the property to increase the taxes even further. at the same time, if there is a fiscal cliff issue, who is going to benefit? not the taxpayer or the middle- class. we what -- we will wind up with taxes increasing at the state level, which means again they have to feed the beast, the beast is the government. the first people to sacrifice for the government are the government people themselves. the federal government employees, 2.2 million people collecting incredible pensions. you just read an article about people that make $388,000 at fannie mae and freddie mac. why are those people not sacrificing? why do we have to pick up the feed that they eventually give us? one gentleman from new york talked about that. i do not have a pension plan. i am 62. i will need social security. my house has twice as much taxes on it as it used to. no one helped me on the fiscal cliff when i lost out in 1991. today everyone gets help. chuck schumer today said that he will want to give tax benefits and credits to people in new york city. who is going to pay for it? host: that is the story from th
i don't get about the fiscal cliff proposal. it seems as if the trophy that the republicans want in exchange for asking people whose income is above $250,000, even though they get a tax break on that first $250,000, ask them to pay a little more, the trophy in return is to ask senior citizens whose median income is $22,000 to pay more? why is this a quid pro quo? why is this fair? why is that the trophy? why is that the exchange that makes sense? the american people say no. say no. medicare, social security, medicaid, these are programs that keep people healthy. raising the age of medicare, really? that's why we have medicare in the first place. insurance companies don't want to insure people and the center for american progress says that if we did that in a single year almost 435 seniors would be at risk of becoming uninsured. is this the goal? i am realy confused about these proposals that somehow equate, really the wealthiest top 2% in our country with extracting something from the poorest adults in our country. seniors and persons with disabilities. mr. garamendi: your points
as the fiscal cliff take effect. bloomberg government hosted a discussion this morning with the top democrat on the house budget committee, chris van hollen as well as republican senator bob corker and senator mark warner. at 9:00 eastern, president obama and house spear jaub boehner and spoke about the fiscal cliff today. republicans might be willing to agree to higher tax rates on the wealthy in january. house speaker calling on the obama administration to respond to the republicans' deficit proposal. president obama is at 9:00 eastern followed by speaker boehner. >> this weekend on c-span 3's american history tv, follow harry truman's eldest grandson to japan. >> everybody has their own view what happened and i don't want to argue survival to anyone in japan about the history. we're past that. and my whole purpose for being here is to listen to the living and to do what i can. >> sunday at 9:00 p.m. eastern on c-span 3. >> the supreme court will look at what was passed in 2008 by a majority of 6-3 i believe and going to say that is precedent. and indiana had a -- >> they decided on the in
of problems in this country and that's why the fiscal cliff, this thing is not the result of taxes, it's as a result of spending and too many people not having jobs to be able to pay in not just their taxes but to be able to sustain our economy. and so we have millions of people that are unemployed and drawing unemployment compensation. we are seeing disabilities rise at a rate of 16% every year. one thing which we note that just before president obama took effect, white house figures show the federal budget was $2.9 trillion. next year's estimate is going to be $3.8 trillion. this is a 31% increase in spending in just four years. we have someone as the president, our great president, who is hung up on taxing and spending. what we need is a house of representatives that's hung up on jobs and job creation. the american product. entrepreneurship. creativity. competition with the world. the next new great ideas. not that will come from this body but from the creativity of the american people. this is what republicans are trying to keep alive in our country. the idea of self-reliance and w
republicans in congress if you go over the fiscal cliff. how long can you have that hard above. -- how long can you afford politically to have those tax cuts? >> america faces a very serious problem and our goal is to make sure it gets solved. we have a debt problem that is out of control. we have got to cut spending and i believe it is appropriate to put revenues on the table. the receive news we are putting -- of the revenues we are putting from, guess who? the rich. there are ways to limit deductions, close loopholes and have the same people pay more -- more of their money to the federal government without raising the tax rates which we believe will harm our economy. >>\[inaudible question] >> i think our members understand the seriousness of faces. trillion dollar deficits for as far as the eye can see. $16 trillion of debt on the books. every man, woman and child owing the american government $50,000 and that number is increasing every single year. as a result, our members understand that we've got to solve the problem, and we will. >> the house is going to leave today with two days le
the compromise. >> we will go around the former members of congress. do they cut a deal to avoid the fiscal cliff before we actually get there? >> i believe so. >> senator? >> yes. the treasury secretary says withholding taxes and does not have to raise them even if the taxes go up. why sequester does not have to be month by month. you can do the sequester in the last 12 months. he gives the congress four or five months into the next year before the house to reach a deal. -- before they have to reach a deal. >> they could kick the can down the road. who thinks the market will not let them do that? there will be punished. sooner rather than later, you think? we have not seen it so far. >> i am in the camp of, the herd will turn. erskine bowles has a famous line. we got away with this last time because we were the best- looking horse in the glue factory. we are not going to get a pass this time. there is no question. who will get punished. and that is very dangerous for everyone, all of us. >> it is great for me to remind you -- you can watch the president on bloomberg television shortly. thank you
getting over the fiscal cliff, the deal getting closer to balance the budget is still very important. i do hope because of the discussion that tax reform is something that is taken seriously for this year. i think that is well overdue. there is not time to do it before december 31. it will give businesses a lot of assurances that the government is paying attention to what they are saying. >> you should tell barack obama to find a jim baker. >> think about each time we have reached a crisis point in our anntry there's been institutional response to tit. we created a central bank. that has proved to be enormous for the past five years and important for years before that. post-world war ii, we create a system and the department of homeland security. i wonder if there's not an institutional -- >> some did not work as well as others. >> that is exactly right. it reflects our values and the focus of the government'. we should have a department of homeland prosperity. we need somebody other than the aboutent to think american competitiveness. something we've taken for granted because we were the
to the federal government, there is a lot of attention on the so-called fiscal cliff. i think here everyone knows what that relates to. that is really more the system. it is not the disease. but washington typically does, it focuses on some things rather than the disease. we need to avoid the fiscal cliff. we need to recognize reality. there is only so much that can be done the balance of this year. we need to do a credible down payment and build a bridge to a grand bargain which would involve more fundamental reforms that have to be achieved. but it controls. -- budget controls. we had but the controls until 2002. we had been out of control ever since. we have had democratic spending policies of republican tax policies which leads to large escalating debt. we are going to have to reform the social insurance programs. we have to reduce defense programs and other spending and the gate in a comprehensive tax reform. that takes time. it will have to of all -- involve extraordinary presidential leadership, which we have not had in a while. hopefully we will get that. it will involve some type of citi
of a fiscal cliff. we did not arrive there by not paying enough taxes. the federal government spends insane amounts of money and even by reducing us all to serfs, the taxes will not cover the spending. well said. here's jerry from lamar. she said, please stop spending our money. walk away from the table if they're not willing to stop wasting our hard-earned money. reform the entitlements and lower the taxes. nothing else in my opinion is acceptable. do not go back to the clinton era. that administration led use in a recession and do not raise the inheritance tax. and then listen to this, she said, i am from a family of farmers. that will kill our family and many others and make it impossible to keep farms that have been in our family for generations. that is the most unfair tax there is. this country will not survive more blows to small business and the middle class. stop the insanity and stop it soon. and finally from patrigsa in jefferson city, she said, i want to voice my opinion on what's happening in washington right now. politicians have put us in this mess with excessive spending. i
. of argentina. i tend to think of this medium and long term risk as the fiscal avalanche. the cliff is something we are approaching now and we can see where it is. we know will hit the cliff. the avalanche is different. the only thing you know about conditions are present. you know when the snowpack has built up to the point where it could happen. you do not know when it is going coming. once it hits you, the avalanche becomes completely impossible to control. do you agree with this characterization about the avalanche? kind of threat? that from you? >> i would be happy. >> i will give you credit. i think it is right. i do think -- that is why what important. this is a once in a generation opportunity for you to nail these things down. we're not that far apart. i really do not think we are. if you are able to put us on a credible path to fiscal sustainability, do it in a balanced way, i think we are golden. i think we will avoid that avalanche. if we do not do that, ultimately, it means we will by that avalanche. that in order to avoid the conditions? >> i do not know the answer to that. my mode
about the fiscal cliff and laying the groundwork for the 2013-2014 election. that is at 10:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. >> in president obama's weekly address, he talks about tax policy, the tax cuts put in place by the previous administration that will expire at the end of the year. then the republican address on the economy, jobs, and education policy. >> hello, everybody. over the last few weeks, there's been a lot of talk about deadlines we're facing on jobs and taxes and investments. but with so much noise and so many opinions flying around, it can be easy to lose sight of what this debate is really about. it's not about which political party comes out on top, or who wins or loses in washington. it's about making smart decisions that will have a real impact on your lives and the lives of americans all across the country. right now, middle-class tax cuts are set to expire at the end of the year. time is running out. and there are two things that can happen. first, if congress does nothing, every family in america will see their income taxes automatically go up on january 1st.
Search Results 0 to 46 of about 47 (some duplicates have been removed)